Abstract
The Emerging Infectious Disease (EID) crisis has been challenging global health security for decades, dealing substantial damage to all socio-economic landscapes. Control measures have failed to prevent or even mitigate damages of an accelerating wave of EIDs, leading to the emergence and devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the wake of the pandemic we must critically review our public health policies and approaches. Current health security measures are based on the evolutionary theorem of host-parasite coevolution, which falsely deems EIDs are rare and unpredictable. The DAMA protocol is nested in a novel evolutionary framework describing how emergence can be prevented before the onset of an outbreak. In this paper, we discuss the importance of establishing efficient communication channels between various stakeholders affected by EIDs. We describe implementation strategies of preventive interventions on global, regional and local scales, and provide guidelines for using such strategies in relevant policy environments of human, livestock and crop diseases.
Keywords : Infectious disease, EID prevention, DAMA protocol, policy implementation, Living Labs, Citizen Science
The Crisis of Emerging Infectious Diseases
The past decades have seen a striking rise in the number of Emerging Infectious Diseases (EIDs) across the globe, whether it meant known diseases appearing in previously unknown areas (e.g. West Nile Virus, Diphtheria, Measles), new variants becoming resistant to treatment (e.g. malaria, MRSA) or completely novel pathogens infecting novel hosts (e.g. SARS, African Swine Fever, Phytoplasma). With the ever increasing rate of globalisation, international trade and travel, EIDs had spread faster than ever before in human history, resulting in a staggering $1 Trillion USD/year for containment costs and production losses before 2020 (1). This figure was further elevated by the recent COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in one of the largest economic recessions since the mid-1900s (2,3). A more significant reason for concern is that the damages in both economic production and human life was highest in the United States and United Kingdom whose healthcare system was announced to have been best prepared for such an event (4,5). These controversial patterns highlight the dissonance between how we try to control EIDs and what we should be focusing on instead.
As is the case with most epidemics, important conclusions are drawn from each case after the fact which should lead to better preparedness for the next such event. However, our investments into disease control and surveillance methods have neither been able to even slow down, let alone stop the acceleration of the EID crisis thus far, nor prevent the COVID-19 pandemic. To understand why our efforts have not been efficient, we must understand what the requirements and limitations of current disease management strategies are, and identify the gaps which allow for new diseases to emerge.